Recently in Decentralization Category

In David Weinberger's white paper, he writes:

We are not in the age of information. We are not in the age of the Internet.

We are in the Age of Connection.

Being connected is at the heart of our democracy and our economy. The more and better those connections, the stronger are our government, businesses, science, culture, education.

Until now, our connectedness has depended on centralized control points that have been the gatekeepers of our economic and political networks. To speak to everyone, you had to be one of the few with access to a broadcast networks. To sell to everyone, you had to be one of the few with access to a global distribution channel. To achieve office, you had to be one of the few with access to corporate coffers and national media.

But we are on the verge of being able to connect to anyone and everyone, whenever and however we want. No gatekeepers. Ubiquitous connection. Connectedness thatís always there and always on.

This isn't about getting more TV channels. Change the way we're connected

and youíve changed everything, from the economy to governance. This is how fundamental transformation ccurs.

In this context, spectrum has nothing to do with electromagnetic waves and auctions. It is far more fundamental: Spectrum is connection.

We will connect. The human drive for connection is too strong to be stopped. The market and the electorate are clamoring for this. Consider just some of the more obvious changes:

When consumers are connected, we turn off the marketing messages and tell one another the truth about what we buy.

When students are connected, they teach each other and work collaborativelyÖeven if they are still being graded as if each assignment were done alone in a cell.

When citizens are connected, we put our money and our votes with politicians who join the fray. Safe, phony words and please-everyone positions sound more hollow than ever. We want our government to recognize and reflect the values connectedness brings.

When an economy is connected, goods and services move faster. Little players get a foothold against the giants. Innovation skyrockets. Risks are taken and investments are made. The old gatekeepers of connection find their treasure is now a commodity. But that commodity fuels an outbreak of economic
growth that will last for decades.

When a society is connected, it becomes more fair. Broadcasting's lock on the channels of communication is broken, so more voices are heard and people are better able to determine their own individual and collected fates.

The Age of Connection will begin with a fundamental change in metaphors and a basic reframing of the issues.

By Paul | Permalink | Comments (1) |

Scott Rosenberg's new article in Salon provides a well balanced review of: The geek-driven world of new "decentralized" technologies like Wi-Fi, blogging and Web services is more about cutting out the middleman than finding a business model.

The internet is first and foremost a communication medium, like the telephone, only potentially infinitely more rich. David Isenberg's elegant view of a Stupid Network with all of the intelligence located at the peers just makes more sense. Attempting to make money by creating the artificial need of a middlemen is ultimately doomed to failure. Only the strong arm of the law could possibly make it otherwise, which is why the policies around Open Spectrum, the Broadcast Flag, the DMCA and others are so important in this crucial struggle for communications liberty over the greed of corporations and the power-lust of governments.

Essentially we are witnessing the birth, a "Supernova" if you will, of people around the world being able to digitally and richly communicate without the need of any middle men for bandwidth or content. This threatens literally the way business and power have always been played. Think of it as analogous to the discovery of a cheap, clean and decentralized energy source without the need of anyone else to provide it. *** Decentralization threatens central power hierarchies ***. So look for the telecom big boys to do everything in their power to prevent such decentralization from occurring. I expect the governments recent branding of Wi-Fi as a terrorist threat, to be the first in a long line of attempts to stop this communications revolution.

By Paul | Permalink | Comments (2) |

I found this article of the same title by David Isenberg and David Weinberger. This paper makes a good case why the best networks are the ones least likely to be profitable for the provider. Essentially we are talking about a shift away from centralized bandwidth distribution in the same way that p2p file-sharing networks decentralize content distribution. Original link posted on Infoanarchy.

Telephone companies are not the only institutions goaded by new network technology. We can see from the reaction to today's Internet that the Paradox of the Best Network is not kind to the recording industry, to book publishers, or to any other group that makes its living by controlling access to content. These groups have already called in the lawyers and lobbyists to protect their current business models. Nor will the new network be popular with any institution, economic, political or religious group that seeks to shield itself from conflicting cultures and ideas.

In fact, the best network embodies explicit political ideals so it would be disingenuous to pretend it didn't. The best technological network is also the most open political network. The best network is not only simple, low-cost, robust and innovation-friendly, it is also best at promoting a free, democratic, pluralistic, participatory society; a society in which people with new business ideas are free to fail and free to succeed in the marketplace.

By Paul | Permalink | Comments (1) |

I just read another great article on open spectrum by David Weinberger; something I have hyped here often. I feel I cannot post enough about this, and this is another good piece describing both the short and long-term but also the deep-term effects open spectrum could have on society - primarily that of participatory democracy. Lets hope this time it comes to pass.

Short term, we will see a sudden breaking free from wireless gridlock: New bandwidth available everywhere. New local radio stations. Wireless connectivity among appliances in the house. Innovations wherever action at a distance or ubiquitous access makes sense.

Long term, Dewayne Hendricks (founder of The Dandin Group and a member of the FCC's Technological Advisory Council) says that we're in the position Marconi was in 100 years ago when wireless communications were first invented. We can't begin to imagine what's possible, including -- and Hendricks is serious about this -- Star Trek-style transporters before this century is out.

Deep term, the unleashing of wireless connectivity will eat away at one of our last remaining social dependencies on broadcast media. Right now, if you want to broadcast you have to get permission from the Feds and you have to have lots of dough. We end up with a society that sits on a couch, facing forward, listening to what people with money have to say. Our freedom is defined by the channel changer nearby. With open spectrum, a bottom-up conversation can begin over the ether, helping to make participatory democracy real.

By Paul | Permalink | Comments (1) |

Freenet does what people thought the internet was supposed to do - free information from censorship. But as we know, information flows through proprietary pipes and exists openly on identifiable servers. This means that not only is our surfing activity and email exposed to prying eyes, but that if certain information is offensive to individuals, corporations or governments it can be removed. More importantly, it has become increasingly difficult to post information on the internet anonymously. The ability to speak freely, openly, and anonymously assures that the person can speak their mind without fear of reprisal or even imprisonment or death. Freenet changes all that. Freenet has been a work in progress for over 2 years, and until now it has been cumbersome to use for the average user. Now, with the release of Freenet 0.5 (download here) it has an intuitive and easy to use interface. Freenet works by storing information in an encrptyed, decentralized and distributed manner. Information resides on individual computers on the network. But not even the computer owner knows exactly what information is stored on their machine. What this means is that even if a government were to demand that information be removed from Freenet at gunpoint, no one would be able to comply. Once information is published on freenet, its is essentially impossible to remove.

By Paul | Permalink | Comments (1) |

From the article on O'Reillys OpenP2P:

"First there was AM. Then FM. Now, the next evolution in radio broadcast technology could very well be P2P.

What could be even more controversial than Internet radio/audio broadcasting--which has made headlines this year over the issue of royalty payments--and P2P file sharing? Probably the merging together of these banes of the music industry. Two P2P clients, PeerCast and Streamer, are exactly that. Without the need to have your own dedicated server, these programs let you stream audio files to other users on a P2P network. Essentially, you can run your own Internet radio station whenever you start up your computer and get online.

There's only one man to blame for Streamer: Iain McLeod of Warrington, U.K., who describes himself as a "self-employed computer game creator." Lately, however, the 39-year-old has been finding himself working more on Streamer, a program which he unabashedly describes as "pirate radio for the digital age" and admits that he created it in response to the music industry's recent efforts to shut down Internet radio stations over royalty payments."

By Paul | Permalink |

Howard Rheingold, the father of virtual communities, is already on to the next revolution - Smart Mobs. He's written a new book and created an updated nice website about it. The revolutionary potential of Wi-Fi is that it enables the emergence of an ad-hoc, on-the-fly, real-time, constantly in-flux wireless and decentralized internet. A company Mesh Networks, has already risen to capitalize on this trend. Everyone becomes a node in the emergent network. The beauty of this scheme is that it would completely by-pass all means of centralized control, and empower old-style internet (i.e. anonymous and uncensored) communications from the bottom-up using the unregulated spectrum of garage door openers. Obviously, the emergence of such a network levels the playing field all over again, and therefore scares the crap out of the big boys. Why? Because such a network could easily bypass all of their expensive networks and revenue streams. Will they attempt to crush this technology using legal or technological strangleholds? They are likely to try, but the tricky part is getting this spectrum regulated when nearly every remote control device in existence operates in it.

By Paul | Permalink |